Patna High Court
Santosh Rai @ Santosh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to strict conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Rai, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging recovery of 227.5 litres of liquor from a vehicle, with charges under IPC Sections 272, 273 and 34 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not the owner of the vehicle, and that the seized liquor was not in his conscious possession; the prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement of another accused made in police custody, which the petitioner contended lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, a deposit of Rs.1500 with the Advocates’ Association, and a condition that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments (or related) Statutes.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
- Whether a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody is admissible as evidence.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement in the seizure of liquor attracts liability under IPC Sections 272, 273, 34 and the Bihar Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- confessional statement
- IPC
- Bihar Excise Act
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of liquor
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3957 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2020 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Santosh Rai @ Santosh Kumar Yadav Son of Rajkumar Rai Resident of
Village- Khalikpur, P.S.- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 227.5 liters of liquor from a Bolero vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3957 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
on confessional statement of apprehended accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 140 of 2020 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3957 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner,
based on instruction, undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.
1500/- with Advocates’ Association, Patna High Court within a
period of two weeks from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…